The work environment has become laden with unsafe practices, many of which are reasonably necessary to accomplish certain tasks. As safety in the work environment has become increasingly important, new attempts to prevent accidents have been implemented. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration are responsible for instituting a number of remedial measures to ensure a safe work atmosphere. However, there are many risks associated with the work environment, which impact non-workers.
Operations involving school buses and heavy equipment remain especially susceptible to unanticipated safety breaches. In many instances, a heavy vehicle operator is not aware of another person's presence near the heavy vehicle; quite simply, the physical size of the heavy vehicle impedes the operator's full view of the immediate surroundings.
Even high mounted rear mirrors only give a partial view of what is directly behind a large vehicle, and then only for a few feet. Often, a school bus driver is unable to ascertain whether all children have cleared the school bus' vicinity. While various combinations of lights and physical barriers have been introduced to meet conventional demands and to provide the safety needed, they require a fair amount of time to be effectively activated and often result in unanticipated safety complications. Motorists and pedestrians alike simply do not react to the breadth of measures instituted to prevent accidents. Clearly, there exists a need for a vehicular safety device which prevents common injuries associated with moving vehicles, while at the same time, does not create further unsafe conditions.
Heretofore, audio devices have been employed to warn of moving vehicles. The sounds heard when some trucks move in reverse attempt to warn nearby individuals of a hazardous situation. However, such sounds are not readily recognizable in areas of heavy traffic. Moreover, the resultant behavior of passerby cannot be forcibly controlled. A simple “chirp” sound might cause one to give attention, but does not communicate any discernible message. Further, despite the implementations of various safety devices, preventable accidents continue to occur with fatal results.
Specifically, many safety breaches are associated with vehicles braking or moving in a reverse direction. Owners of school bus and heavy truck fleets recount incidents in which their vehicles have impacted people who were not visible to the vehicles' operators.
Traditional audible signals, alone or in combination with flashing lights and physical barriers, are not completely effective in creating a zone of safety around vehicles. Also the vast amount of noise and commotion associated with loading docks prevents drivers from being able to accurately discern the proximity and number of individuals or objects near the vehicle. Accordingly, the need arises for an audio safety apparatus for use with various types of vehicles, which is easily installed and which introduces educational ideas to children, drivers, and the general public. The audio safety apparatus must provide for instantaneous information communication specific to situations and corresponding participants in a zone of danger. Moreover, the audio safety device should be capable of distributing various safety messages, so that any appropriate message can be repeated in connection with the current situation. The audio safety apparatus should be either a single piece of equipment capable of addressing a variety of safety concerns, or a collection of components wherein the apparatus would be tailored for situation specific accident prevention. There is plurality of inventions directed to large vehicle safety problems. The various patents described below are but illustrative of the developments commonly found in the field of the present invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,504,336 issued to Oliver W. Boblitz on Mar. 31, 1970, describes a safety seat belt warning system comprising a reel device for retracting a section of a seat belt when the belt is not fastened about an occupant of a motor vehicle. Pressure-sensitive electrical seat switches in the motor vehicle's seats are activated by the presence of a passenger.
If a passenger does not fasten a safety belt, a light or buzzer alert is enabled. The result is not capable of warning a driver, passengers, and pedestrians of vehicular movement or lack thereof. Thus, the Boblitz device cannot be used to provide an early warning signal for prevention of vehicle-pedestrian collisions, as provided by the present audio safety device. Further, Boblitz's device is incapable of delivering a plurality of messages to drivers, passengers, and others outside of the motor vehicle. Moreover, voice-chip technology is not contemplated.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,470,036 issued to John F. Doerr on Sep. 4, 1984, describes a safety light warning system for vehicles comprising three color coded lights to indicate driver foot position with respect to the brake and gas pedals. There is no provision for audio warning signals. Accordingly, the Doerr assembly cannot be used in conditions of low visibility, as no provision is made for communicating warning messages but for sustained illumination and flashing lights. Moreover, Doerr's device does not provide for a driver interface wherewith messages can be selectively broadcast.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,839,749 issued to Eustace B. Franklin, on May 19, 1987, describes an audio reminder system for drivers comprising an electronics system that automatically activates a tape recorder programmed to provide an audible speech message of a specific vehicle fault or a time-dependent personal message. Franklin's device specifically aims to provide a siren detector circuit, a speed indicator circuit and a timed personal message circuit.
Unlike the present invention, no means is provided for communicating messages to those outside a vehicle. Further, Franklin's device does not even contemplate the need to communicate with people outside a vehicle. Moreover, Franklin's device warns of vehicular irregularities and faults; but it does not provide means of broadcasting audible signals in response to the aggravated braking and irregular backing movement inherent in the operation of heavy trucks and buses. Franklin's device is of a remedial nature, whereas the present invention is characteristically prophylactic.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,916,372 issued to James Reavell et al. on Apr. 10, 1990, describes a school bus safety device wherein a stop sign or a crossing arm swings out upon the opening of the bus door. While Reveall's device does communicate with vehicles adjacent to a school bus, it does not provide for audible signals or warnings of any kind. Further, it is incapable of displaying alternating or situation specific messages, unlike the present invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,199,754, issued to Lowell J. D. Freeman on Apr. 6, 1993, describes a safety bar comprising a motor driven barrier for installation on the front end of a school bus. The result is not capable of adequately warning a driver, passengers, and pedestrians of vehicular movement or lack thereof. Freeman's device merely deters pedestrians from walking directly in front of the bus.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,210,521, issued to Gary M. Hojell on May 11, 1993, describes a safety warning system for vehicles comprising a Doppler radar system to detect nearby persons.
When a person is detected close to the bus, the bus driver is warned, thereby increasing the possibility of avoiding an accident. There is no provision for communicating audio warning signals to individuals outside the school bus. Furthermore, Hojell's device is not capable of preventing individuals from wandering precariously close to a bus. The present invention avoids dangerous situations by communicating a warning message before an accident-prone situation develops. Moreover, Hojell's device does not provide for a driver interface wherewith messages can be selectively broadcast.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,226,686, issued to Glenn A. Triggs on Jul. 13, 1993, relates to a safety gate for school buses, which is mounted on the front bumper of a vehicle. The device is a physical barrier only, and does not attempt to communicate an audible warning.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,357,239, issued to Ronald C. Lamparter on Oct. 18, 1994, describes a safety bar and sign comprising a motor driven barrier for installation on the front end of a school bus, and also, a stop sign deployed simultaneously with the barrier. The result is not capable of audibly warning a driver, passengers, and pedestrians of vehicular movement or lack thereof. Similar to Freeman's device, Lamparter's device merely deters pedestrians from walking directly in front of the bus, but does nothing to warn them that the bus is about to move forward. The present invention warns a school bus driver to walk around the bus to ensure that all children have cleared the area before any further bus movement occurs.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,406,250, issued to James Reavell et al. on Apr. 11, 1995, discloses a cold weather stop sign for deployment in conjunction with the opening of a school bus door. Analogous to the prior art discussed above, Reavell's device encourages safe practices in the vicinity of school buses. Unlike the present invention, however, Reavell's device does not communicate an audible message.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,467,071, issued to Don M. Koenig on Nov. 14, 1995, describes a warning kit, which produces a visual safety warning to passengers of a vehicle, and to drivers of nearby vehicles, and audio safety prompting messages that are audible to the passengers. Unlike the present invention, Koenig's device is not capable of allowing a bus driver to emit a message to individuals outside of the bus who are not boarding. Further, Koenig's device is not capable of producing audio messages in response to movement of the vehicle itself, whereas the present invention produces audio messages in response to various input variables. The present invention sends messages to the bus driver with reference to the children inside the bus.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,510,763, issued to Norman Deckard et al. on Apr. 23, 1996, is directed to a strobe light on the back of a truck. The light is activated when the truck's transmission is either in reverse or in park, and is contingent upon operation of hazard lights. Unlike the present invention, Deckard's device is not capable of broadcasting an audio message in response the truck's transmission position.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,015,991 issued to William Barr on May 14, 1991,is directed to an alarm system for signaling thereof. The signal is enabled when a vehicles door is open and the selector lever of an automatic transmission is not in its full park position. Barr's device is not capable of broadcasting specifically, the exact prescribed message in response to the predetermined mechanical operation of the vehicle.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,923,852 issued to Jerome Lemelson on Jun. 12, 1990, is directed to a machine operation, which is subject to variations in its operational characteristics requiring adjustments, maintenance or replacement of machine parts. Lemelson device is not, and has no way of educating the operator about a specific predetermined mechanical behavior of the vehicle and did not teach a specific prescribed response to a predetermined mechanical condition of the said vehicle.
European Patent Publication No. 90-100731/14 EP-361, 104-A relates to trim fittings for the outside of a vehicle, wherein electronic display strips show programmed messages for road users. Unlike the present invention, no means of broadcasting an audio message is disclosed. None of the above noted patents, taken either singly or in combination, are seen to disclose the specific arrangement of concepts disclosed by the present invention.